ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Alhamdulillahirabbil
alamin, thank
you to Allah Swt. His grace and
blessings have guided to where I am today. Firstly, I would like to thank my thesis
supervisor, Mrs. Dahlia
Indra Nurwanti, M pd. for her
patience
in guiding and supporting me
through the whole process of writing this thesis. My
heartfelt thanks also go to her who always
tried to spend his time to advise me with this
thesis.
I would like to thank my deaf colleagues who are working with me at the Pancasakti University Tegal. Many, many thanks to all
member of D class for being the consultants for my
thesis. Without their help and support, I wouldn’t
be able to finish this thesis.
This thesis could not have been written without the informants of Brebes
and Pemalang Sign Language
whose names could not be
mentioned here. Thank you so
much for being the
informants in this study.
My endless gratitude goes to my family: my parents, my older sister,
and my sister. Their limitless and undying love has always kept my spirit high during I finish this research. I dedicate this thesis to
you
all.
Writer
Table of Content
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………. i Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………...
ii Table of Content………………………………………………………………………. iv List of tables..…………...…………………………………………………………….. vi List of figures..………………………………………………………………………..
vii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION…..………………………………………………….. 1
1.1 Research Background.…..………………………………………………
1
1.2 Research questions…..………………………………... 2
1.3 Objectives….……………………………….. 4
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE
REVIEW….………………………………………….. 5
2.0 Sociolinguistic………………………………………………………………………
5
2.1 Dialect….………………………………………………………………
7
2.2 Variation…..………………………………………………………... 10
2.3 Regional Variation
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY…….……………………………………………... 13
3.0 Location and Subjects…………………………………………………………..
13
3.1 Research Design………………………………………………………………… 13
1.
Data
Collection
2.
Data
Analysis
3.2 Research Procedures….………………………………………………………...
15
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS...………………………….……...
22
4.0 Findings….…………………………………………………………………….. 22
4.1 Discussion….……. 23
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION….……………………………………………………. 72
References….…………………………………………………………………………. 74
Appendix 1 (a) The Swadesh word list…....………………………………………… 77
(b)The additional word list…....……………………………………….. 79
Appendix 2 (a) One of the reversible sentences stimuli….………………………… 81
(b) One of the non-reversible
sentences stimuli….....………………… 81
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Indonesia
is one of the most linguistically and culturally diverse nations in the world.
Over 550 languages are spoken throughout the archipelago and in
1945 Indonesian was selected as the official language of government, mass media, and education. Although Indonesian is rapidly becoming the first language of many Indonesians, especially in urban centres, many Indonesians still learn and speak regional languages and their dialects (Sneddon, 2003). Social and regional
varieties of Indonesian and regional languages are dynamic and constantly developing. Despite language purists lamenting these varieties as a degradation of correct and proper
forms, these non-standard registers, or stylistic variations, are a very real
reflection and representation of Indonesia’s diverse communities and their members.
Recent
studies of non-standard Indonesian registers include
colloquial Indonesian (Errington, 1986;
Ewing,
2005;
Sneddon,
2006),
bahasa
prokem (Collins & Chambert-Lois, 1984), Jakarta Backwards Youth Slang (Dreyfuss, 1983),
bahasa gay (Boellstorf, 2004; Oetomo,
2003) and bahasa
gaul (Smith-Hefner, 2007).
With the exception of colloquial Indonesian, these registers have also been described as
codes and secret languages (Collins & Chambert-Lois, 1984; Dreyfuss, 1983;
Boellstorf, 2004; Oetomo, 2003; Smith-Hefner, 2007). Although some of these
varieties may have emerged
as speech-disguise codes, the
above studies all suggest
that the primary
role of these different registers is to promote and foster a shared identity and sense of community among their speakers.
Although
there is significant scholarship on regional and social varieties of Indonesian, less has been studied about similar varieties in other languages spoken in
Indonesia. In this paper,
the authors present
a brief linguistic description of a regional variations of Tegalan
dialect spoken in Tegal, Central
Java.
Javanese is an Austronesian language and is the largest regional language spoken
in Indonesia, with around 80 million speakers (Oglobin 2005). Javanese is
primarily spoken in central and eastern Java, but there are also large Javanese
speaking communities in Banten,
West Java and in
Lampung, South Sumatra as well as in
countries outside of Indonesia such as Surinam
and New Caledonia (Robson, 2002;
Wedhawati et al., 2005).
Early Dutch and English linguists were intrigued
by Javanese’s complex speech
levels that can be broadly
categorised into two main
registers: ngoko and
krama. Robson (2002) defines ngoko as “the style in which one
thinks to oneself
and uses to
one’s intimate family and friends of
the same age or younger” and krama as the speech style one uses to speak to and talk about “a stranger
or someone who is socially superior” (12). The two styles are used in different proportions to
indicate distance, respect and familiarity. More recent studies, however, have
focused on regional variations
present in Javanese. Javanese is
usually classified into three
main regional dialects;
East Javanese, Central Javanese,
and Standard Javanese (Keeler, 1992). Tegalan dialect is characterised by variations in
pronunciation, grammatical and discourse
features. However,
as Robson (1991) notes “geographically defined variations can also occur on
the micro-level of the villagers” (3).
While
there has been a lot of research into Javanese
speech levels and regional variation, fewer studies have explored non-standard social varieties of Javanese
(see Robson, 1991). In Javanese there are a lot of dialects, for example jawa
timuran dialect, wetanan dialect, banyumasan dialect, tegalan dialect, etc. and
those dialects have variations inside it. The variations are divided into
regional variation and social variation. But the author focuses in regional
variation in Tegalan dialect.
1.2 Research
Questions
1. What
are the similarities and the differences among variations in Tegalan Dialect ?
2. What
are the causes of it ?
1.3 Objective
of the Research
This research aimed to describing some
variations in tegalan dialect. And the author focused in regional variations
from tegalan dialect only in Tegal regions there are Brebes and Pemalang. The
author wanted to know are there the similarities and the differences from it
and what did make it different.
2. LITERATURE
REVIEW
2.1 Sociolinguistic
Based
on Wikipedia :
Language is basic to social
interactions, affecting them and being affected by them. Connie Eble of the University of North Carolina
explains how the field of sociolinguistics analyzes the many ways in which
language and society intersect.
Sociolinguistics is the study of how
language serves and is shaped by the social nature of human beings. In its
broadest conception, sociolinguistics analyzes the many and diverse ways in
which language and society entwine. This vast field of inquiry requires and
combines insights from a number of disciplines, including linguistics,
sociology, psychology and anthropology.
Sociolinguistics examines the
interplay of language and society, with language as the starting point.
Variation is the key concept, applied to language itself and to its use. The
basic premise of sociolinguistics is that language is variable and
changing. As a result, language is not homogeneous — not for the individual
user and not within or among groups of speakers who use the same language.
By studying written records,
sociolinguists also examine how language and society have interacted in the
past. For example, they have tabulated the frequency of the singular pronoun thou
and its replacement you in dated hand-written or printed documents and
correlated changes in frequency with changes in class structure in 16th and
17th century England. This is historical sociolinguistics: the
study of relationship between changes in society and changes in language over a
period of time.
2.2 Dialects
Based
on Wikipedia :
Sociolinguists also study dialect —
any regional, social or ethnic variety of a language. By that definition, the
English taught in school as correct and used in non-personal writing is only
one dialect of contemporary American English. Usually called Standard American
English or Edited American English, it is the dialect used in this essay.
Scholars are currently using a
sociolinguistic perspective to answer some intriguing questions about language
in the United States, including these:
·
Which
speakers in urban areas of the North are changing the pronunciation of vowels
in a systematic way? For instance, some speakers in Buffalo, Cleveland, Detroit
and Chicago pronounce bat so that it sounds like bet and bet
so that it sounds like but. Linguists call these patterned alterations
the Northern Cities Vowel Shift.
·
Which
features of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) grammar are used by
middle-class white teen-agers who admire contemporary African-American music,
entertainment and clothing? For instance, white adolescents might speak
approvingly of the style of a peer by saying she money or he be
jammin’ — sentence structures associated with African Americans.
·
Which
stereotypical local pronunciations are exaggerated to show local allegiance?
Such language behavior has been pointed out recently for Pittsburgh, New
Orleans and the barrier islands off North Carolina known as the Outer Banks. At
the end of the 20th century, connections between the isolated Outer
Banks and the greater world increased. This changed the local seafood industry
and made the Outer Banks a destination for a growing number of tourists. Using
the typical way that the natives pronounce the vowel in the words high
and tide, these North Carolinians are called Hoi Toiders. They
continue to use this distinctive vowel even though in other ways their dialect
is becoming more like other American dialects.
Variation also correlates with
social factors outside of language. For example, Appalachian working-class
speakers reduce consonant clusters more often than northern Anglo-American
working class speakers and working-class African Americans, regardless of their
region, reduce consonant clusters more frequently than do other working-class
speakers. Thus, the occurrence of final consonant cluster reduction is
conditioned internally by its position in the speech stream and externally by
the social factors of socioeconomic class and ethnicity.
Another example of an internal
linguistic variable is the pronunciation of the words spelled pen, ten
and Ben so that they sound as if they were spelled pin, tin and bin.
This variable correlates with being Southern, regardless of age, gender,
socio-economic class or ethnicity. However, among Southerners, the
pronunciation of ask as if it were spelled ax correlates with
ethnicity, because the pronunciation is used most often (but not exclusively)
by African Americans.
Another pronunciation variant that
correlates with a social category is heard in New Orleans. In working-class
neighborhoods, words spelled with oi are often pronounced as if spelled er.
For these speakers, then, the word point rhymes with weren’t. Age
is another social variable. In North Carolina, elderly speakers often pronounce
duke, stupid and newspaper with a y-sound before the vowel. Instead of the common pronunciations
dook, stoopid, and nooz for these words, they say dyuke, styupid, and nyuz.
(This is basically the difference all English speakers make between the words
food and feud; feud has a y-sound before the vowel.) Speakers born after World
War II seldom use this pronunciation.
The examples above have all
concerned pronunciation, but language also varies in vocabulary, grammar and
use.
2.3 Variation
Based
on Wikipedia :
Variation in language use among speakers or
groups of speakers is a principal concern in sociolinguistics. Such variation may occur in pronunciation (accent), word choice (lexicon), or even preferences for particular grammatical patterns.[1]
Studies of language variation and
its correlation with sociological categories, such as William Labov's 1963 paper "The social motivation of a sound
change," led to the foundation of sociolinguistics as a subfield of linguistics.[2][3] Although contemporary sociolinguistics includes other
topics, language variation and change remains an important issue at the heart
of the field.
Sociolinguistic
variables
Studies in the field of
sociolinguistics typically take a sample population and interview them,
assessing the realisation of certain sociolinguistic variables. Labov specifies
the ideal sociolinguistic variable to
·
be
high in frequency,
·
have
a certain immunity from conscious suppression,
·
be
an integral part of larger structures, and
·
be
easily quantified on a linear scale.[4]
Phonetic variables tend to meet
these criteria and are often used, as are grammatical variables and, more
rarely, lexical variables. Examples for phonetic variables are: the frequency
of the glottal stop, the height or backness of a vowel or the realisation of word-endings.
An example of a grammatical variable is the frequency of negative concord
(known colloquially as a double negative).
2.4 Regional
variation
Based
on Wikipedia :
Some regional
variations are the consequence of a
federal
style
television network or
radio network
where a local station is part of a larger
broadcast
network and broadcasts the network's programmes some of the time and
its own programming the rest of the time. The latter is therefore sometimes
considered a regional variation. Examples of this include the UK's
ITV network throughout much of its history, and
American network
affiliate stations.
Regional variation
is also a common term used in British television listings publications, such as
magazines and newspapers, to show the different programmes broadcast in
different areas of the country.
3. RESEARCH
METHOD
3.1 Location
and Subjects of the research
The location for the research is in
Tegal region such as Tegal, Pemalang, and Brebes.
The writer took some subjects for the
research, the writer took two Pemalang persons, and three Brebes persons.
3.2 Research
Design
·
Data Collection
To analyze the
regional variation in Tegalan dialect found in Tegal area (Pemalang
and Brebes), this research was conducted by
using
comparative method. By applying comparative method, the researcher tried to find the contrast
of the problem based on the data. The comparative method does not show special
characteristic in many ways of
the
research. After comparing two data in field, the
writer analyzed the data based on the fact. This research deals with the
similarities and the differences some variations in Tegalan
dialect
especially in Pemalang and Brebes.
In collecting the data, the researcher asked several informants
of the native speaker of two
Pemalang persons and three Brebes persons. The data were the words that produced by the native speaker of two Pemalang persons and three Brebes persons in Tegal area dialect. There
were 5 native informants that
taken by the researcher. The passage
with title “Kain Batik” were given to the native speakers and they
translated the passage orally from Bahasa Indonesia into Tegalan dialect because there is no written information
about the difference of
Pemalang and Brebes variations that is found by
the
writer. The informants in this research were selected based on several criteria.
In the process of collecting data, the researcher needed some
instruments. The researcher
used the passage
to ask the native speaker. Tape
recorder was used to record the utterances and monologue of the informant. Equipment such as notebook, pen or pencil was also the supporting
instrument in
order to write the related data to this research.
·
Data Analysis
In
analyzing the data, the
data
were
listed and classified
based
on
the with the similarities and the differences some variations in Tegalan
dialect
especially in Pemalang and Brebes. The
classification
based
on
the vocabularies,
and pronounciation changing. Then, the data were described and analyzed in order to find which variation are mostly changing by comparing the word Pemalang
and Brebes and also to
find which variations were replaced by which leads to the word change. Finally, the conclusions were taken from the data which has been analyzed and has been classified based on the findings.
3.3 Research
Procedure
The writer should do some steps to finish this
research. The first thing that the researcher did is took the theme for his
research, the researcher chose the theme
that has relation with sociolinguistic materials, so that the researcher chose
regional variation for his research. The second one is the researcher chose the
material for his research and the
researcher chose the passage with title “Kain Batik”. The third one is the
researcher look for the places and the informants for his research and the
researcher chose Tegal for his research, two people from pemalang and three
people from Brebes. The fourth one is the researcher did the research by asking
the informants to read the passage loudly and recorded it. The last one is the
researcher analyzed the data that the researcher got and made a report from his
research.
4. FINDINGS
AND DISCUSSION
4.1 FINDINGS
Based
on the research, researcher used this text below:
Kain Batik
Kain batik
merupakan karya seni Nusantara yang dihasilkan dari kebudayaan daerah,
khususnya di Jawa Tengah dan Bali. Kota seperti Cirebon, Yogyakarta, Solo, Pekalongan, Priangan dan
Madura terkenal sebagai daerah penghasil batik. Walaupun teknik yang diterapkan
sama, namun kain batik dari beberapa daerah memiliki corak dan motif yang khas.
Kain batik
dibuat dari mori. Menurut mutunya, mori yang biasa dibuat menjadi kain batik
dapat dibedakan menjadi tiga macam, yaitu primisima, prima, dan biru. Primisima
adalah mori yang paling baik, halus, dan harganya mahal. Mori primisima biasa
dibuat kain halus yang ditulis tangan, dan menjadi kain bermutu tinggi. Prima
adalah kain mori bermutu sedang, yang juga biasa dibuat kain batik tulis. Mori
biru adalah kain mori yang mutunya kurang bagus, tipis, dan tenunnya agak
jarang. Mori ini tidak bisa digunakan untuk membuat batik tulis, karena lilin
untuk membatik akan menembus ke bawah. Mori biru bisa digunakan untuk membuat
batik cap yang harganya agak murah.
Untuk
memperoleh kain batik yang bagus, diperlukan proses yang panjang. Pewarnaan
motif-motif batik diperoleh dengan cara mencelup. Di samping itu, juga dengan
menutupi bagian-bagian tertentu dengan lilin
atau malam. Malam dibuat dari bahan-bahan, seperti gondorukem, damar,
lemak sapi, malam loro dan malam kote. Malam dapat dibeli di toko bumbu batik.
Pewarna untuk membuat batik tradisional terdiri atas wedel dan soga. Wedel
adalah pewarna biru yang diolah dari bahan-bahan nila, teres dan gamping. Soga
adalah pewarna cokelat atau sawo matang yang diolah dari bahan-bahan kayu plika
atau kulit kayu soga, kayu tingi, kayu tegeran dan bunga somba.
4.2 DISCUSSION
There were 68 words collected from the native speakers,
there were 38 words which have a different
vocabularies between Brebes and Pemalang. There were the same vocabularies but different pronounciation. And
there were also the differences from each variations itself. There were only 5 different
vocabularies in Pemalang variations. There were different vocabularies in
Brebes variations. And the differences listed in the table below.
|
Brebes
|
Pemalang
|
Meaning
|
|
Jarit
|
Bahan
|
|
|
Mlebu
|
Kuwi
|
Is
|
|
Sing
|
Sing
|
|
|
Dihasilna
|
Digawe
|
Produced
|
|
Sing
|
Soko
|
From
|
|
Khususe
|
Khususe
|
Especially
|
|
Nang
|
Neng
|
In
|
|
Dadi
Terkenal
|
Wes
Terkenal
|
Be famous
|
|
Penghasil
|
Nggaweni
|
Producer
|
|
Senajan
|
Naliko
|
Although
|
|
Diterapna
Tapi
Nduwe
Khas
Digawe
Jare
Mutune
Dadi
Dibedakna
Telung
Rupa
Yakuwe
Apik
Alus
Larang
biasane
Ditulis
Anggo
Tangan
Mutune
Duwur
Kuwe
Sedeng
Kurang
Tipis
Tenunane
Rada
Arang
Kiye
Digunakna
Nggawek
Nimbus
Mengingsor
Rada
Murah
Kanggo
Meroleh
Diperlukna
Proses
Dawa
Warnani
Dicelup
Sejabane
kuwe
Kudu
Ditutupi
Karo
|
Gawene
Neng
Duwe
Bedo
Digawe
Soko
Mutune
Kading
Dibedoake
Telu
Werno
Yoiku
Apik
Alus
Larang
Biasane
Ditulis
anggo
Tangan
Bermutu
Duwur
Kuwi
Sedeng
Ora
patio
Tipis
Tenunane
Arang-arang
Kiye
Dienggo
Gawe
Tembus
Areng
ngisor
Modo
Murah
Kanggo
Hasil
Dibutuhake
Proses
Suwe
Pewarnaane
Dicelup-celupake
Karo
Kudu
Ditutupi
Atek
|
Apply
But
Own
Unique
Made
Quality
Become
Different
Three
Kind
Is
Good
Soft
Expensive
Usually
Written
Use
Hand
Quality
High
That
Medium
Less
Slim
This
Used
Make
Go
down
Little
Cheap
For
Get
Needed
process
long
draw
must
covered
with
|
|
Sing
Dituku
Warna
Tradisional
Diolah
|
Kadi
Dituku
Pewarna
Tradisional
Diolah
|
From
Bought
Color
Traditional
|
The differences
between pemalang variations
|
Informant 1
|
Informant 2
|
Meaning
|
|
Soko
Nggaweni
Nalika
Neng
Kading
|
Kadi
Gawe
Walaupun
Tapi
Dadi
|
From
Made
Although
But
Become
|
Same
vocabularies but different pronounciation
|
Brebes
|
Pemalang
|
Meaning
|
|
Kaya
Cara
Pada
Bisa
Regane
Carane
Utawa
|
Koyo
Coro
Podo
Biso
Regone
Corone
Utowo
|
Like
Way
Same
Can
Price
The way
Or
|
The
differences between Brebes Variations
|
Informant 1
|
Informant 2
|
Informant 3
|
Meaning
|
|
Mlebu
Nang
Karo
Senajan
Cara
Diterapna
Pirang-pirang
Dadi
Rupa
Yakuwe
Lan
Nggawek
Kanggo
Meroleh
Sejabane
Karo
|
Kuwe
Neng
Garo
Meski
Teknik
Digunakna
Endi-endi
Gadi
Macem
Kaya
Tuli
Gawe
Ben
Olih
Selaen
Nenggo
|
|
Including
In
With
Although
Way
Applied
Various
Become
Kind
Is
And
Make
For
Get
used
|
5. CONCLUSION
Based on the findings and discussions in the previous chapter, it can be concluded that although Brebes and Pemalang used Tegalan dialect
but there are many differences in vocabularies and pronounciation. And there
are also the differences between those variations itself.
The writer suggests the others to analyze the variations in
different region because
it
will make and create different ideas and
thoughts, so that, the study about the variations will grow up and better
in
the future. Moreover, this research
also
can
be used as the references
for
the related linguistics studies. Hopefully this research can be very useful to increase and
enrich the knowledge of the reader about Regional
Variation.
Reference
Boellstorf, T.
(2004). Gay Language and Indonesia: Registering Belonging. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 14(2),
pp. 248-268.
Collins, J. T. &
Chambert-Loir, H. (1984). Those
Who Speak Prokem. Indonesia, 37,
pp. 105-117.
Dreyfuss, J. (1983)
The backwards language of Jakarta youth (JYBL), a bird of many
language feathers. In James Collins (Ed). Studies
in Malay Dialects.
Jakarta: Badan
Penyelenggara Seri NUSA, University of Atma Jaya, pp.
52–56.
Ernawan, Y. (2008) Slang sebagai simbol replikasi klas di Yogyakarta Masyarakat, kebudayaan dan politik, 21(3), pp. 245-249.
Errington, J. (1986). Continuity
and Change in Indonesian Language Development.
The Journal of Asian Studies, 45(2),
pp. 329-353.
Ewing,
M. C. (2005). Colloquial Indonesian. In
Adelaar, A & Himmelmann N. P. (Eds.), The
Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar. USA: Routledge, pp. 227-258.
Keeler, W. (1992). Javanese a Cultural Approach. USA: Center for
International
Studies Ohio University.
Oetomo, D. (2003). Memberi suara pada yang bisu [Voicing
the muted]. Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Marwa.
Oglobin, A. K. (2005). Javanese.
In Adelaar, A & Himmelmann N. P.
(Eds.), The
Austronesian Languages
of Asia and Madagascar . USA: Routledge.
pp.
590-624.
Robson, S. & Wibisono, S.
(2002). Javanese English Dictionary. Singapore,
Periplus
Publishing.
Robson, S. (1991) Patterns of Variation in Colloquial Javanese. Clayton:
The Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University.
Robson, S. (2002). Javanese Grammar for Students. Melbourne: Monash University
Press.
Robson, S. (2011). Javanese script as cultural
artefact: historical background.
Review of Indonesian and Malaysian Affairs, 45(1&2), pp. 9-36.
Smith-Hefner, N. J. (2007). Youth Language, Gaul Sociability, and the New
Indonesian Middle Class. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 17(2), pp.
184-203.
Sneddon, J. (2003). The Indonesian Language. Sydney: University of New South
Wales Press Ltd.
Sneddon, J. N (2006). Colloquial Jakartan
Indonesian. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific
and Asian Studies, Australian
National University.
Wedhawati,
Nurlina W. E. S., Setiyanto E.,
Sukesti R., Marsono & Baryadi I.
P. (2006). Tata Bahasa Jawa
Mutakhir. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
Bibliography r method
Aditya, S
Dodiet. 2009.
Penelitian Deskriptif.
Retrieved from
1.pdf on februari 2013
Akmajian,
Adrian. 2001.
Linguistics: an Introduction to
Language and
Communication. London, England: The MIT Press.
Casad, Eugene H. 1994. Dialect Intelligibility Testing.
Dallas, Texas: Summer
Institute of Linguistics.
Chamber, J. K and
Peter
Trudgill.
1980.
Dialectology. London:
Cambridge
University press.
Croft,
William.
2000.
Explaining
Language Change. Edinburgh:
Longman
Linguistics Library.
Francis, W.N. 1983.
Dialectology. New York : Longman Inc.
Fromkin, Victoria A. 2007. Linguistics: An Introduction to Linguistic Theory.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Jufrizal.1996. Morfofonemik Bahasa Minangkabaunese Dialek
Padang Area.
Denpasar:Universitas Udayana.
Katamba, Francis. An
Introduction to Phonology. New York. United States of
America. Longman Inc.
O’Grady, William. Michael Dobrovolsky. Francis Katamba. 1997. Contemporary
Linguistics. United Kingdom. Licensing Agency Ltd.
Refnaldi. 2008. Phonetics and Phonology. Padang: UNP Press Padang.
Roach, Peter. 2007. English Phonetics
and
Phonology.
London: Cambridge
University Press.
Trask, R. L. 2007.
Language and Linguistics. 270 Madison Evanue. New York.
Wardhaugh. 1977. Introduction to Linguistics.
New York: Mc Graw-Hill Inc. Wray, Alison. 1998. Project In Linguistics. London : J W Arrowsmith Ltd.
